Telling people what they're going to do before they even can do it is provocative, manipulative, and indicates that they cannot have a conversation with you because you're already engaged in a conversation elsewhere.
Also, I would recommend taking your own advice. By that I mean examine your approach and results it solicits and revise your approach. For example, you referred to anarchy as a belief. The fact that humans do not exist in separate, opposing moral categories is objectively and observably true. Accepting the truth is not a belief.
Meanwhile, Statism not only is a belief, but an irrational conclusion. From this, we can derive that people did not arrive there by way of logic, reason, or evidence. As such, the likelihood that logic, reason, or evidence will pull them out of it is very slim. They NEED for their conclusion to be valid because to question it would potentially lead to a loss of their friends, their family, and everything they thought they understood about the world. So you are essentially challenging people who cling to beliefs for what they view as self-preservation to risk that self-preservation.
If somebody handed you a knife and said to slit your wrists as hard as you can and you will find true happiness; to not worry, that the blade is dull and would in fact feel good, would you accept their invitation? Do you think the provocativeness of your presentation would be inviting? You literally said to people that they have to do what you want them to or else it means X, Y, and Z about them. Which in a way is inviting people to leave behind all the abusive people from their past to side with another abusive person.
RE: My Statist & Anarchist Challenge